500 words a day on whatever I want

Rented Negroes

A Rented Negro is a black person who is paid or otherwise helped by whites for putting a black face on white opinion and power. An Uncle Tom with stock options.

For example, the second black mayor of St Louis, Clarence Harmon, a Democrat, was called a “rented Negro” before his election in 1997. He was also called the “white man’s candidate” and a “race traitor”. He was seen as serving the interests of whites over those of blacks for his own political gain.

The black talking heads you see on American television news are mostly Rented Negroes: unlike most blacks few are to the left. That cannot be an accident. In the blogosphere you can see the black left in all its glory – but on television it is strangely absent.

Well, not so strangely when you think about it: unlike the blogosphere, nearly everything you see on television was put there by white men, by white news editors, producers, screenwriters and so on. Even BET is white-owned.

That means blacks who pretty much agree with whites – or, even worse, play to their stereotypes – will have a much easier time getting on television than those who do not. So even though you see black faces on television, it is still pretty much the World According to White People.

And you know this because every now and then something breaks through the White Space-Time Continuum that is American television: Rodney King, Katrina, Reverend Wright, Michelle Obama’s pride, etc. Briefly you see into another world before the break in the Continuum closes up again and the Rented Negroes resume their places.

Rented Negroes can be on the left, like Harmon, or on the right, like Alan Keyes. It is not the opinions that make you rented but renting them to white people for their benefit, giving them a black face to hide behind.

Are Rented Negroes sell-outs?

Some clearly are, like Amy Holmes and Booker T. Washington, who changed their public opinions to suit whites.

Others, though, did not have to change their opinion. After all, blacks have all kinds of opinions just like everyone else, so some are bound to have Rentable Opinions – like Juan Williams, Clarence Thomas, John McWhorter and Alan Keyes. And yet they cannot be so unworldly as to not see that they are rented.

As to Booker T. Washington, he did not openly push for equal rights, even though most blacks could not vote. He did not push for an end to Jim Crow, even though blacks were being hanged from trees. Instead he said blacks must first pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Education, hard work, saving money and patience were the way.

That was just what white people thought too! Like the rich white people who gave money to his school, Tuskegee.

So did Washington truly believe what he was saying or was he a bought man? We have his private letters so now we know the answer: he was bought.

Share this post:

Like this:

112 Responses

Abagond, I wonder about the “rented Negro”. Is it that they fully understand their rented status, and have no qualms about renting themselves out—or is it that they have no mind of their own, fully believing what their owners tell them is reality, thereby not really selling out themselves in their own minds?
Or is it somewhere in the middle?

Ouch, concerning Booker T. Washington. I prefer not to think so, but who knows?

John McWhorter, for example, says that racism is over. If he is right then there is no need for Rented Negroes and so he cannot be one. But for me it is hard to shake the idea that he is just fooling himself and that deep down he knows it.

Whoopi Goldberg is a rented negro or at least an apologist for white racist.

And then there was that whole Ted Danson blackface incident

As for Booker T washington and the whole bootstrap thing that pisses me off because he is a native informant to white people “see even one of your own thinks so.”And the Thing is not everyone has straps on their boots

Anton A – good question. I’m inclined to say yes due to the backpaddling Obama has performed on many issues to suit the (white) status quo of his party; whether said issues are black issues or not. It’s the embracing of white appeasement that qualifies.

The thing about Booker T Washington, regardless of who he was, he actually did something to advance Black folk. These modern rented Negroes do absolutely nothing. Tuskegee is a premier institution and has advanced science in Agriculture and Biology.

dee, I am a believer in education and hard work as well. I’ve seen how education and perserverance can change circumstances. However, that doesn’t mean racism and discrimination are not issues, or that they no longer need to be confronted and discussed (and I don’t think doing such amounts to “complaining”). I tend to agree with this quote from Barack Obama’s Dreams from My Father: “You might be locked into a world of your own making…but you still have a claim on how it is shaped. You still have responsibilities.”

I say that they are only sell-outs, if they change their opinions to suits whites. Black Americans clings too much on the us vs. them mentality and “sticking” together. I hate the way The Tea Party is going it, it seems some BP tend to follow whatever “seems” positive. I hate when people act like Obama’s God. I think he’s doing a decent job, but I don’t agree with everything he’ doing. No. We shouldn’t be treating each other like a beehive. Black people tend to really dislike it when other BP speaks about their personal opinions. Rented Negro itself is a racist term because it implies that all Black people are alike and if they don’t then they’re traitors. Kissing up to please someone makes you a stupid puppet Having a different take on racism doesn’t make you a traitor, either.

The problem with this “rented negro” thing is that it’s too often used by lazy analysts to dismiss black people who hold different political views without asking oneself “why would they do that”?

It is, in other words, in most cases an ad hominem.

I don’t like certain black people’s opinions and I think that they are being used as tools (to wit, J’s views on race and how these are informed by classic Aryanism). I would hesitate to call such people “rented negros” or “Uncle Toms”, however.

By the way, how did “Uncle Tom” become a synonym for “race traitor”? I’ve read Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Beecher-Stowe’s work is melodramatic, certainly, but Uncle Tom a race traitor?

Tom is beaten to death by his cruel master but he never reveals the whereabouts of two escaped female slaves.

This character’s name has become synonymous with “race traitor” and “rented negro”.

“Black Americans clings too much on the us vs. them mentality and “sticking” together.”

Could it be a natural reaction to that exact fortress mentality that white hegemony has embraced since colonizing this country? I agree that it gets damaging (in that it’s severely limiting) over time, but failure to do so would’ve spelled the demise of any black American community very shortly after emancipation. If anything, it is white middle class christians who have THE edge on that mentality. Why else would we have the atrocious laws that AZ has enacted and an obnoxious horde of fools who think suddenly that they don’t have to pay their taxes (incidentally when we have a black president)?

And I personally don’t know a single person that voted for Obama who believed he was some sort of superhuman/messiah/whatever. THAT fabrication was entirely the product of the astroturf conservatives that were trying to create a “magic negro” caricature out of Obama.

“The problem with this “rented negro” thing is that it’s too often used by lazy analysts to dismiss black people who hold different political views without asking oneself “why would they do that”?

Forgive me here, this is just nonsense, and if it is true then it would explain why you are trying to convince us here there is no such thing as ‘race’ and a host of other spurious arguments.

When people disagree with you, then you choose to revert to insults or the suggestion, that the other person is disagreeing because it does not fit his/her world view.

These are classic style of Thad’s reasoning.

Do not ‘Rented Negroes’ also have their own terms, just like you have your own of ‘aryan’ (even though you seem to be confused about the term, the ideology etc), but you use the term nonetheless.

I do not understand your last comments. You are defending ‘rented negroes’ on the basis of their ideology and rejecting another group of Blacks with a different ideology, because it does not meet your world view.

I contend this would be consistent with your world view regarding ‘race’.

That “Uncle Tom” characterization is very old. It wouldn’t have to be reference to the character in Uncle Toms Cabin.

Dee,

What does “hard work, education, saving money and patience” got to do with racism? One can do those things and be passed over for promotions, unable to get the best mortgage, the car you want or other things one might strive for without it being about race.

What racism does is take you out of the position to be passed over, get the best mortgage, loan or included in the competition? For example if you have graduated with top honors and a person throws out your resume, because you were named Khadija and not Morgan or your zip code(known to be a predominately Black neighborhood) was flagged in a career database.

The rented Negro in my estimation is not a Black person that holds a conservative view, is that their view is accompanied by Black bashing. They portray themselves as unique and that the other Negroes are the ones to be watched, for they are suspicious, free loading, baby making, immoral and degenerate human beings. That the others fit all of the true stereotypes the white man had said all along.

@JForgive me here, this is just nonsense, and if it is true then it would explain why you are trying to convince us here there is no such thing as ‘race’ and a host of other spurious arguments.

J, I’ll say it again as you obviously didn’t get it through your skull the first 58 times I’ve said it on this board:

RACE EXISTS. It exists, however, as a socio-political and historical construct, NOT as a biological construct, which is what you seem to think it is (otherwide, why give is this crap from the racist Metapedia about how Indians are descended from Mongoloids, as if these “races” existed in the biological sesne?)

Got that? Let me repeat it, because I know you have a hard time with this concept: race is not a “blood” thing, it’s a socio-political thing constructed in a given historical matrix. It exists, but it is not determined by biology.

Got it?

I hope so.

As to why I think you’re beliefs are based on aryanism, that’s because it’s quite clearly where their intellectual roots lie.

The people who believed that a certain band of white folks had a given kind of biology which made them far and away more notable than any other people on the planet were the Aryanists, led by Gobineau and going down in an unbroken line to your buddy Michael Bradley today.

The only difference between your beliefs and that of classical Aryanists, as far as you’ve expressed them here, is that they would substitute “notable” with “noble” and “superior” and you would subsitute “notable” with “barbaric” and “bloodthirsty”.

So congratulations, J: if this is afrocentric thought, all it has done is take what Gobineau believed in 1870 and swap out good adjectives for bad. The underlying beliefs – that blood is politics, that there are coherent subspecies among human beings and that these subspecies can be “ranked” from positive to negative – those beliefs are exactly the same.

Now I’ve been explaining this for close to a month now and not once have you taken umbrage with it or bothered to try to show how your views are distinct from those of the aryanists.

Simplifying, J: the aryanists believed in biological race and that white was good and black was bad. You believe in biological race and that black is good and white is bad. Both of you believe that blood is destiny and should rightly rule politics.

You think am making an incorrect assessment of your beliefs? Fine, J: tell us where I’m getting it wrong.

I do not understand your last comments.

Improve you’re English comprehension skills then. Those comments are quite clear. In uncle Tom’s Cabin, Uncle Tom died under torture rather than reveal the whereabouts of two escaped slaves. Why then do we use “Uncle Tom” as a negative term for black sell-outs?

1. Race did exist as a ‘biological construct’, all it is that Whites have decided post-World War 2 that it would no longer exists, even though the world is still constructed along racial lines nevertheless (ie White Supremacy).

2. The more you write the more you reveal your ignorance here. What Gobineau’s theory ended up doing was suggesting where White people were superior to POC. Now Whites could be classified in exactly the same way, with some Whites being superior to other inferior Whites. This was a first. And this is where the concept of ‘Aryanism’ begins to develop, and what Hitler was utilising.

3. Whether I improve my English you will always be the ‘fool’ here, so that is not going to help matters.

For instance you confuse me with Hathor. Since I never spoke or addressed you concerning the subject of Uncle Tom’s cabin.

Dismissing all of these people as “rented Negros” is a facile way of avoiding challenging opinions. What they say may be pleasing to some whites, but that does not mean that their message is not beneficial to blacks.

In what sense was Booker T. Washington bought? He believed in political equality for blacks but did not raise the issue much. However, favoring political equality is not inconsistent with also believing in self-development and uplift.

The penultiate paragraph, states, and it also identifies the subject matter also:

“I do not understand your last comments. YOU ARE DEFENDING ‘RENTED NEGROES’ on the basis of their ideology and rejecting another group of Blacks with a different ideology, because it does not meet your world view”.

I think the black protest culture that developed during the 50s and 60s served its purpose well; it gained political equality for African Americans. But how can economic and social equality be achieved? That’s trickier than gaining the right to vote. I think this is where Washington’s philosophy becomes useful.

@JI do not understand your last comments. YOU ARE DEFENDING ‘RENTED NEGROES’ on the basis of their ideology and rejecting another group of Blacks with a different ideology, because it does not meet your world view.

No, J. That is most certainly not what I am doing. I would not call any group of blacks “rented”. I disagree with your essentially fascist philosophy. I think it makes you a tool of white supremacists more than it does anything positive in this world. In short, I probably feel about you like you feel about john McWhorter.

What I DON’T do is call you a “Uncle Tom” or a “Rented Black” because it takes all kinds. Black people have a right to have political oppinions all across the spectrum, just like white people. So even though I oppose your fascist take on afro-centrism and even though I think it gives succor to white supremacists because it ultimately supports the notion that political action in this world is and should be exclusively directed by race and each race should have essentially a single political position on any issue, I wouldn’t call you a “sell out” or an”Uncle Tom”.

In other words, I’d rather attack your politics and expose them for what they are then simply toss ad hominems at you and claim that your political position “sets the race back”.

FG,
You act as if Black folk do not believe in economic development and uplift. Even Black Democrats and liberals believe that.

What you are saying is one of the talking points that the rented Negro focuses on. It compares all Black people to the least productive person.

Actually conservative philosophy has never been diametrical opposed by most people. Most people are politically in the center. What composes conservative philosophy now is wingnuttery.
Strom Thurman had a more cohesive argument and philosophy than cable news pundits and talk show host.

Thad said: ““The problem with this “rented negro” thing is that it’s too often used by lazy analysts to dismiss black people who hold different political views .”

J replied: “Forgive me here, this is just nonsense.”

So you believe, apparently, that there are many”rented blacks” because to say that this term is abused, to you, is nonsense.

And yet now you say: “I would not call any group of blacks ‘rented’.”

So what is it, J? Are there or aren’t there “rented blacks”?

Because if you buy Abagond’s opinion, right-wing blacks are rented. And yet you have one of the most reactionary philosophies of anyone on this board. You can’t get much more “conservative”, J, than preaching that 19th century views on race were essentially correct.

Protest was a tactic, not a culture. It is also a right. There was much more going on with Black people than marching and still is.

Most people are not entrepreneurs, so they look for jobs. Black people have many skill sets, but where are the jobs. They get educated in mostly two year schools. The health care industry is the largest employer in my city. You see Black people in all aspects of the industry, from phlebotomist to medical doctor.

The problem is that there are not enough jobs to employ all people and the market is mostly saturated with small business and corporations hire off shore.

Employers are driving up the entry requirements and their are not many Black people that handle $30,000/year college tuition. This is not include housing, books and supplies and food. It seems that employers are pre-selecting a certain group of people since they can’t outright discriminate

Bill Cosby, for example, said that blacks are their own worst enemies, not racism. It is a very rentable opinion, but as far as I know he said it of his own accord. He was not trying to seek the favour of whites. He was just speaking his mind. So he is not rented.

On the other hand, Clarence Harmon, one of the main examples in the post, was a Democrat and yet he was called a rented Negro because he was seen as acting in the interests of whites against blacks.

“Rented” speaks to motive and who is pulling the strings, not to the opinions themselves.

1. He did great material good for blacks through Tuskegee and through raising money for other HBCUs.

2. He is right to urge blacks to get an education, work hard and all that. After all, who in their right mind would urge anyone they cared about to drop out of school and lay about?

3. He never said anything in public that his white donors would object to. They had, in effect, bought his silence. We know because in private he was for equal rights and secretly gave money to fight for them in the courts. But in public he just said what the white man wanted him to say.

He was letting white people believe that everything was all right – black people just have to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. White people on this blog are STILL saying that stuff a hundred years later:

Bill:“It’s a shame to watch an entire race stew in poverty, crime and self-pity. The answer is…yes, pull yourself up by your bootstraps.” – July 13th 2010.

i mean, let’s presume that there’re some other factors at work in this world than race, OK? I mean just for sh**s and giggles. Factors like, oh, say, class (and realize that I’m just taking a wild stab in the dark here, because no one would ever DREAM that control of capital could actually impact on your life chances, right?)

Let’s say Mr. X is black and a capitalist. And because of racism, that means he’s going to be one of the relatively few black capitalists. So Mr. X decides to do what’s in his CLASS interest. Of course, this will benefit far many more white people than black people (even if we look at it proportionately).

So is Mr. X a race traitor or a class supporter? Or both? In any case, there’s no necessary reason to believe that he’s been “rented” by white people if what he’s doing is in his interest or in the collective interest of another group he belongs to.

3. He never said anything in public that his white donors would object to. They had, in effect, bought his silence. We know because in private he was for equal rights and secretly gave money to fight for them in the courts. But in public he just said what the white man wanted him to say.

I have a lot of sympathy for him, because particularly in his day, he would have likely achieved little by railing against the system. He had to play the game and make compromises, but ultimately accomplished things that improved the lot of black people.

I do agree with Hathor’s earlier comment that this is what separates Washington from todays rented negroes – actually achieving things, rather than just cosying up to white folks.

Thaddeus,
Your last post has nothing to do with a rented Negro.
As I said earlier, the modern rented Negro does nothing. Being a pundit or host on TV isn’t promoting their capitalist interest. They are earning a salary, not creating wealth.

If all would have the same self interest, then why wouldn’t race be the motivating factor, because that would be what each would have in common? If profession is a class then why are not all Black people rented Negroes?

Aye,
‘Rented negro’ are people who unconditionally loves their country and have the misfortune of living in a country that does not love them back.

They would be a fine breed of people if they were living in a fine country.

But not in this case.

They struggle until they find some bizarre balance in life , safekeeping their mental sanity.

I think it is some kind of delusional madness, but for them, it is righteousness.

And they would have no rest until they convert and save us all.

Problems arise with the frustration and anger when they realize that they can’t, when they suspect that a certain population’s behavior might be the reason for which their love for the country remains unrequited.

Why can’t Black have their own political opinions without there being a problem? This reminds me about how some Black people say “Black people don’t do this or that” or “that’s White people stuff.” Growing up I would hear things like:

“Black people don’t speak like that”
“Black people don’t listen to rock or pop”
“There are no Black Catholics most of us are Baptist”
“Black people don’t play lacrosse that’s for white people”
“A Black Republican is an oxymoron”

Black people are not a monolithic or Homogeneous group! We are not all the same. We have different upbringings, tax brackets, religious affiliations, nationalities, etc. I’m a Black Latina, I play lacrosse, I’m Catholic, I like all music but rap. It’s not fair that Black people have to fit a certain stereotype to be accepted by even their own people.

I consider myself a “liberal” and there is nothing wrong with people having their own political opinions. It was my choice to become a liberal because the ideals fit my personality and had nothing to do with my race. Just like I choose to listen to System of the Down, Green Day, The Killers, Blink 182, and Nine Inch Nails. Just like these so called “rented Negroes” choose to be Moderate and Conservative it suited their personality.

I don’t agree with many liberal policies myself. I think the government should get rid of Affirmative Action, Welfare/Section 8, I think they should give the death and penalty to Rapists, Child Molesters and Child Killers.

Why do we all as Black people have to do the same thing just because other Black people to do it? Why is it that if a Black person chooses to think for themselves or does something different they are labelled a “rented Negro” or a “uncle tom”? All Black people are not the same.

I find in funny, in Florida, the Cuban population almost always votes Republican, as do some Asian/Middle Eastern populations around the country as well. But no one makes a big deal out of it and I don’t see their race tearing them down for having different opinions.

It appears that quite a few people missed the point, but I think those same people would have called some people “brown noses” at some time in their lives. It could have been a relative, a co-worker , a subordinate or a boss. Most of us know what type of person you mean when you say a “brown nose”, but somehow when it comes to the term rented Negro, we hear about diversity of opinion.

Let me just say a rented Negroes are “brown nosers” only their noses are up the white supremacist ass.

I agree that the elderly should have section 8. But I think it should be temporary for those young enough to work and get jobs. Section 8/Welfare in America has become a generational cycle of poverty that needs to break. Too many people are dependent on it and they take advantage of the system. They should be having programs that help people get off section 8 not stay on it. The amount of money they use to pour into the failed Welfare/Section 8 system they could be using to make jobs for some of these people and nationalizing the public school system so they these welfare/section children can get a equal education just like every other public school kid in America so they they will be on the same level and they would get out of the cycle by gaining a higher education.

“I find in funny, in Florida, the Cuban population almost always votes Republican, as do some Asian/Middle Eastern populations around the country as well. But no one makes a big deal out of it and I don’t see their race tearing them down for having different opinions.”

That’s the point. I live in Miami too and because they “stick together” politically, they have POWER; political, economic, and otherwise. They may not all think the same, but they are wise enough to recognize the common good when the need arises.

Why? IMHO, I believe the difference is having a quantifiable culture that is shared by all. No one is ever accused of being too Cuban or not Cuban enough. They are all Cubans, period. That allows for the wide swing in political and cultural views.

Being Black Americans, we are still struggling to even *define* our culture. We are not African. We are not Blacker-White Americans. We certainly are not the stereotype that others see us. So who are we, culturally? That’s the question that keeps us bickering about who is “really” Black.

In ANY group of people you will always have those that succeed (in a variety of ways) and those that fail. And a lot in the middle. We seem to despise those at the top, making it hard (for a variety of reasons) for them to reach back and provide more opportunities and we celebrate those at the bottom, giving them no incentive to better themselves. A vicious cycle ensues.

Hathor has it right. “Brown-noser” is way closer in meaning to “Rented Negro” than “conservative” or whatever.

In the post I said:

“After all, blacks have all kinds of opinions just like everyone else, so some are bound to have Rentable Opinions.”

The opinion itself does not make you a Rented Negro – it is whether you rent it out to white people for their benefit.

Saying all blacks with right-wing opinions are Rented Negroes would be like saying all blacks with guns are criminals. Some people might see it that way, but they are presuming stuff they should not be presuming. I presumed nothing of the kind in my post.

If all would have the same self interest, then why wouldn’t race be the motivating factor, because that would be what each would have in common? If profession is a class then why are not all Black people rented Negroes?

One could argue that many people are, Hathor. One could argue that capitalism is just a more clever way of milking people than slavery. And one could argue that most people – white and black – recognize this in their heart of hearts and that’s why the more egregious examples of lining one’s own nest at the expence of others become seen as “selling out”.

But I’d say it’s mostly a function of where you stand. Middle-class and wealthy blacks with a college education who work for mostly white companies and have managed to claw their way up to a certain point in life are liable to be seen as “sell outs” and “rented negroes” by less fortunate blacks living in the projects, aren’t they?

I think the post is getting at (and this is something I would agree with) the idea of a rented Negro as someone who, in part, posits him/herself up as an “exception” to the general (negative) rule about Blacks. I think the “rented Negroes” do this to appease Whites, either personally or professionally. I guess I understand the “rented” part to indicate “acting against one’s own self-interest”–to be a “rented Negro” you have to claim your inferiority, then work to prove that you are doing your best to overcome it. At least, that’s how I distinguish a “rented Negro” from a “Black person with an opinion that is stereotypically thought of as against the majority opinion”.

Ms. DR,

I don’t know any Cuban people who disparage Republican Cubans, but I do know people who don’t consider Cubans (and Argentinians, often–sometimes Puerto Ricans) “real” Latinos/Hispanics. I think the idea of some people not being “down with the cause” isn’t unique to Black folks.

Ms. DR,
You are beginning to sound like one yourself. The welfare system was reformed during the Clinton administration and the application in many states will not allow for someone to continue to get benefits without working. Most of those jobs are only paying minimum wage so how would you pay for rent on a decent house or an apartment if you have one child to take care of.

Your description of the welfare recipient is a rehash of the last thirty years of speaking about Blacks on welfare and a talking point of the rented Negro. No matter if laws have changed or if it is true for the majority of Blacks..

Reading over the post I can see how it can be misleading since I put so much weight on right-wing blacks on television. So I changed the post somewhat to make it a bit clearer that it is not right-wing views in and of themselves that would make anyone rented.

I guess when white Americans say,” I even have a black friend who comes to my house” …this is the person they are talking about…

I sometimes watch Fox to remind myself how stupid these people are and it’s a shame when I see Juan Williams there…even though sometimes he put’s himself in danger of getting his contract cancelled by saying something that makes sense i.e. contradicts Sean Hannity or Bill O’Reilly

As for Booker T. Washington, I don’t know much about him but it sounds as if he had to do the song and dance to get what he wanted, (you know the saying “you can’t bite the hand that feeds you”)….black people today still have to play the game at work if they wish to move ahead their careers (at least in the US)

“Ms. DR,
You are beginning to sound like one yourself. The welfare system was reformed during the Clinton administration and the application in many states will not allow for someone to continue to get benefits without working. Most of those jobs are only paying minimum wage so how would you pay for rent on a decent house or an apartment if you have one child to take care of.

Your description of the welfare recipient is a rehash of the last thirty years of speaking about Blacks on welfare and a talking point of the rented Negro. No matter if laws have changed or if it is true for the majority of Blacks..”

Hathor most people on Welfare are whites. I never said anything about Black people on welfare. Why are you assuming that the majority of welfare recipients are Black? I think you making the conclusion that welfare equals black seems very rented negro also.

I don’t agree with welfare at all plain in simple. It should be reformed and mad completely temporary. I think the government should get rid of the system and raise the wages so that these people can afford rent, food, healthcare.

People should stop having children out of wedlock or having children when they know they are economically destitute. Why bring children in this world when you can’t feed them with your own hands? If you can’t feed them than don’t breed them.

@ Abagond

The only POC on tv I see actually working for white people is Michelle Malkin. She’s crazy. I remember watching FAUX NEWS(FOX NEWS) and she talked about how Japanese internment was positive. WTF? Michelle is crazy, Japanese interment was a crime against humanity. Michelle is the attractive and Asian version of Ann Coulter.

It is easy to judge others. It is easy to classify and categorize. Why is it that we as Americans seem so quick to judge – to separate, classify, segregate, politicize, etc???

There are many people who judge without first understanding. Of course, public figures will always be targets by their very nature. But what about those that do not make that choice?

Ex: Kenneth Gladney is an entrepreneur. Kenneth Gladney has a fairly successful business selling items at political events such as buttons, shirts, hats, etc… Kenneth Gladney was selling items at a Tea-Party event when he started getting harrassed and eventually beaten up – landing him in the hospital.

1. Kenneth Gladney is Black
2. He was publicly humiliated by being called an ‘Uncle Tom’.
3. Those comments exposed on national television made towards Kenneth Gladney are being refused retraction. No apologies!!!
4. Kenneth Gladney also sold many Pro-Obama items at many political events. As a successful businessman would do, he sold as many products at as many events as possible in order to increase his profits. The majority of his items sold during the presidential campaign were marketed towards Obama Supporters.

So, this man was called an Uncle Tom for selling items to consumers at a Tea Party political event? Moreover, he was physically assaulted and BEATEN (at a Tea Party event by people opposing the Tea Party)

Judgement: I ask why? Why is he called an Uncle Tom? Why is he beaten? The biggest question of all: Why is he still being called an Uncle Tom? What an ugly thing to say to this man.

Was this man a sellout? I think not. I think this man is a victim of those too quick to judge, too filled with misdirected anger to take the Higher road.

“We can never judge the lives of others, because each person knows only their own pain and renunciation. It’s one thing to feel that you are on the right path, but it’s another to think that yours is the only path.”

Juan Williams has actually made A LOT of great points when discussing/debating with many leading Conservative Commenters. He’s great at not allowing them to ‘misdirect’ him away with distractionary tactics.

Magicians are masters of slight of hand, and so are many of the people we see in the media, regardless of their political stance.

I used to watch him on “Fox News Sunday”, this roundtable news talk show on Sunday afternoons on Fox News. It was hosted by Chris Wallace. Juan Williams was the only black person there.

Every now and then one of the white commentators would say something extremely boneheaded and Juan would just sit there. Sometimes he would get this look on his face – BUT HE NEVER WENT IN FOR THE KILL! At best he would say something like, “Well, that’s not quite fair…” but then not stand his ground. It gets me upset even now thinking about it. Even within the Republican framework of Fox News and his own conservatism he was being overly deferential to white opinion.

I have done that too at work – but I am not a POLITICAL COMMENTATOR being broadcast coast to coast.

C’mon now. You brought up the term to as if adding some spice to a molotov cocktail: So as to when you partake of the drink, all the more burning satisfaction you should have! LOL

Just kidding…. It was used previously so I latched on to it. I guess the way I make sense of it without “derailing” is that we’re talking about “Race for Rent”, essentially: Judgements, preconceived ideas, prejudice, political ideas, public figures – but what about non-public figures? I guess I mentioned it because I thought it was noteworthy.

As individuals we all have ideas. Public ideas and figures are one thing, but the sad thing it that this can spill over into “our private” lives and innocent people suffer for the judgement and ignorance of others.

As for “NAME CALLING”, it seems no matter how mature we think we are, we still can’t shake that innate nature we had as children to do the very same. (We just substitute the rudeness for more politically correct terms – or do we?)

@ JGreyden But realistically, its easier to do that and make the best of the present situation than to try and change society’s elements you can’t control. Couldn’t what Booker T Washington said be applied to today? Instead of people complaining so much they should just hit the books and then black people would be stereotyped as being smart and hard working, cause more black people would reflect that.

You have stereotype formation backward. Many people think that stereotypes come out of partial truths, but really, stereotypes come out of confirmation bias (i.e., we see what we want to see). When this bias is combined with negative thoughts about a certain ethnic group, you end up with people who “can’t win for losing”.

Example: Asian American men. The (seemingly) positive “model minority” stereotype says that they are smart, good with computers, etc., but that intelligence is coupled with nerdiness, awkwardness, etc. People who cling to the idea of White superiority aren’t going to take well to Asians who are “smarter” (according to a system designed by and for White people), so what seems like a definite positive quality gets twisted until it appears it has a drawback. Stereotyping works backwards–you find the point you want to “prove”, then look for the evidence that supports your conclusion. Examples to the contrary are usually dismissed as anomalies.

@ Natasha W I agree. But I guess there’s different jobs for everyone. Some people prefer to spend more time being activists while some would rather just try to make the best of things.. but they’d have to work harder to get further in life than someone who was white. Sorry this response is late btw, I missed your post til JGreyden pointed it out.

My answer to both would be: Juan Williams is a Rented Negros (I just love that term now!) and Kenneth Gladney is the *definition* of a Sellout.

1. Kenneth Gladney. He choose to try and do business with a group that many Blacks and POC think is a quasi White Party Movement. He did that FOR PROFIT. Unless he sides with the Teabaggers, he *sold out* to make money.

@ Jasmin I don’t think people should prejudge other people based on stereotypes, cause everyone is different. I personally wouldn’t want to be given that treatment so I try not to do that w/ somebody else. But aren’t some stereotypes based on trends? Like when they show the SAT scores per race.. how come its a trend for black people to not do as well as other races? Is the data false? Just because someone’s poorer doesn’t mean they can’t work hard in school and stuff. If your poor that seems like more motivation to want to succeed actually

There are people in far worse situations who get scholarships to top universities because of their hard work. People should appreciate what they have cause someone always has less. Obviously its going to be easier to get the best education if you’re rich and go to a top notch school but why does that always have to be an excuse to not try and beat the odds. The only way people are gonna get richer is if they work harder so they can get out of the poverty situation or its just gonna repeat. white people are more privileged and they have more trust funds and stuff cause of unfairness in society for hundreds of years, so instead of waiting for the govt to do something about it people should take it into their own hands so they can provide a better life for their kids. making the best of their situation

And African immigrants to the U.S. are actually the “model minority”, not Asian immigrants

I can’t even begin to address the fail in that comment–the best thing I can suggest is that you a) read the comment I wrote to you above again (I can’t figure out where you went wrong), b) Google “stereotype formation” or “confirmation bias”, c) rinse and repeat.

Out of curiosity, are you from the US? You seem to have a limited understanding of the American education system, which is why I ask.

Aw…you really are a sweetie. However, we must remember to distinguish someone who thinks of themselves as a bully from someone who actually matters.

The way I see it, there are two kinds of trolls: the ones who simply try to trigger an outburst, and the others who think they’re actually “doing” something when they submit their comments. Despite this tiny difference, both are merely sound and fury signifying absolutely nothing.

I disagree about Gladney being a sell out, but I respect your opinion. My main contention is that even if one were to establish him as a sell out, that doesn’t “make it right” that he is called a racist name and publicly humiiliated. If one wants to condemn racism and prejudice in any of its ugly forms, it probably should not be done so utilizing the very same type of hate speech.

That was my whole point about rushing to judgement: especially towards an individual we really know very little about. It is actually quite sad.

Let me preface by openly saying, Welcome to the Devil’s Advocate: Ironic that an alleged “racist political’ group would be supporting Gladney’s business ( I mean, why not boycott and buy from the White vendors?). Furthermore, there was no harrassment from what we know. Instead, the harrassment and following beating came from a Liberal group there to protest the Tea Party. Somehow, I just find that far too ironic.

I guess I’ve put Gladney in MY shoes. In which I mean: *I* think the Teabaggers are a veiled White Power Movement (just smart enough not to be openly racist). So to try to make a quick buck off of their movement, seems like selling out. To me it does’t “look” political. Neither did the TownHall meetings. I’ve seen that look before. I looks like seething hate.

*He* may not see them that way and so, may not see that as going against his own. I think to really sellout, you have to be aware that that’s indeed what you are doing.

I believe *most* Black people feel uneasy, at the very least, with the Tea Party and those that beat him up made that same rush to judgement I did.

“Could it be a natural reaction to that exact fortress mentality that white hegemony has embraced since colonizing this country? I agree that it gets damaging (in that it’s severely limiting) over time, but failure to do so would’ve spelled the demise of any black American community very shortly after emancipation. If anything, it is white middle class christians who have THE edge on that mentality. Why else would we have the atrocious laws that AZ has enacted and an obnoxious horde of fools who think suddenly that they don’t have to pay their taxes (incidentally when we have a black president)?”

And see, we got Bush for 8 years because of it. Stupid white christians that liked his dad voted him. If you side with someone just because that person belongs to a same group as you, then you’re an idoit. Just because someone is vaguely from the same continent doesn’t mean they have your best interests at mind. The white people that supported Bush and the black people that support Obama because he’s going let bp rule everything share the same brain cell.

An uncle tom with stock options thats funny. And yes Whoopi Goldberg is a rented negro. I have been feeling some kind of way about her for tears didn’t know what to make of her. But this describes her perfectly. And when I read about Booker T. Washington in depth I was so disappointed in him. He was a sell out i thought as well. Rented Negroe describes these individual to a tee.

Say what you want people.The fact is racism is alive and well and will continue to thrive as long as humans are humans.This whole “rented negro” is just more evidence. Though some people may genuinely be good people they will always see color and will either be-little or praise it.This has gone on for centuries. People lack the ability to see others for who they are if color is a component of that other person.Our history ( not just America but everywhere) is far too dark to forget and will forever add any needed spark to the fire of racism. Basically what I am saying is we are not good enough people to ever squash our racial differences and our horrible past that despised race. It may appear to get better but when it does we will either twist the truth or create another vehicle to drive racism. Fair enough?

The us v them and ingroup/outgroup stuff is probably natural to the human condition, but not the levels of racism seen in America. That stuff is sick and twisted and off the chain. White people are SCREWED UP but, because they control the mainstream culture they can NORMALIZE it and make themselves seem Basically Good. They judge everything according to themselves. Whatever they do is “natural”. So their racial caste system is seen as part of human nature, even though their One Drop Rule is pretty strange stuff.

Racism – dividing the world into a handful of races based on physical appearance and then excusing an unequal society based on that – is not more than 500 years old in the West. The Ancient Greeks certainly did not think like that. Nor the Jews. The word “whites” only goes back to the early 1600s.

This idea that racism is natural IS part of racism, part of what keeps it in place.

No matter how bad things are, they can always be made better. America has proved it can do that with the civil war and the civil rights movement.

[…] Repetition – Every decade since colonial times, one or more of these brainwashing methods have been used against Aframs. They have been used over and over again in mass media (books, magazines, newspapers and films) and now in electronic media such as the Internet. Brainwashing Aframs has become a highly sophisticated endeavor utilizing twenty-four hour television news cycles, talk radio programming and Rented Negroes. […]

I understand, in a way, many people’s issue with Booker T. In his defense, he did what few have ever done, leave an institution dedicated to educating Our people – with an education that helps them build their own society. He did it with white money, but for our benefit (it’s called strategy ). Who else has been an institution?